- Joined
- Apr 3, 2007
- Messages
- 1,699
- Reaction score
- 721
So whos this Oppenheimer guy and how can he open up a fairly succesful lab by himself? Is he a well known pathologist?
What's this guys business model?
What's this guys business model?
Oppenheimer Urologic Research Laboratory
- Thread starter KeratinPearls
- Start date
- Joined
- May 16, 2009
- Messages
- 49
- Reaction score
- 1
What did you see his jop posting on pathologyoutlines?
http://www.prostatelab.com/
Looks a bit tentative....
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2004
- Messages
- 486
- Reaction score
- 3
Hmmmm. I met him at the Residents Forum meeting held in Boston at USCAP in 2009. I remember him mainly because he kept interrupting the Question and Answer (Town Hall) section of the meeting by going to the mic and lecturing to all of the residents (rather than asking any question of the panel of speakers) about how they should come and talk to him if they are really interested in making money and using digital pathology to sign out cases away from the office, etc, etc. We finally had to ask him to stop interrupting and to remind him that this was intended for residents to ask questions rather than for sales pitches from him. So, as you can see, he did not leave a good impression with me, but maybe I am judging him too harshly from this.
To answer you, it seems that he was trying to pitch the idea of scanning in GU biopsies and then signing them out from wherever over the internet. In fact, during the RF meeting (or one of the mixers/parties), he was at a table in the back of the room supposedly signing out cases on his laptop (he had virtual slides of prostate biopsies pulled up if I recall correctly).
To answer you, it seems that he was trying to pitch the idea of scanning in GU biopsies and then signing them out from wherever over the internet. In fact, during the RF meeting (or one of the mixers/parties), he was at a table in the back of the room supposedly signing out cases on his laptop (he had virtual slides of prostate biopsies pulled up if I recall correctly).
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2003
- Messages
- 2,962
- Reaction score
- 79
I remember that path_anon was crapping his panties because this guy was moving into California. I wonder how things turned out.
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2003
- Messages
- 28,059
- Reaction score
- 438
Is it still called the Oppenheimer Urologic Research Lab? I always wondered what the research part meant since it seemed to be a big reference lab.
Interesting in the CV he calls what seems to be a fellowship a "post doctoral fellowship." Does anyone call it that?
Interesting in the CV he calls what seems to be a fellowship a "post doctoral fellowship." Does anyone call it that?
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2007
- Messages
- 1,699
- Reaction score
- 721
Sorry it actually is Reference instead of Research.
- Joined
- May 16, 2009
- Messages
- 49
- Reaction score
- 1
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2003
- Messages
- 28,059
- Reaction score
- 438
He has no beard on that link - which is it, I'm confused! 
The training of the business aspect of pathology is lacking in all residency programs.
I have been pretty disappointed in my "parent organization" viz. CAP, so far. The leadership lacks focus and is not "aggressive enough". As long as this "passivity" continues we will continue losing our hard earned dollars (coupled with our respect as physicians) to hospitals, megalabs and other physicians.
It has been my longstanding conviction that diagnostics pathologists, especially surgical pathologists, should separate themselves from experimental, clinical and forensic pathologists. We have nothing in common. The worst mistake was leaving the surgery department and joining the pathology department. Surgical pathology should have started a whole new field and named itself "diagnostic medicine" but the surgical pathologists at that time had no or limited vision and we are suffering as a consequence. After renaming ourselves "Diagnostic medicine" we should move forward and incorporate all diagnostic modalities including basic/advanced imaging (even step into interventional procedures after all we already do some procedures like FNA and Bone marrow) and ofcourse molecular diagnostics (We should lobby for only physicians and not pHDs interpreting and reporting out newer tissue diagnostic modalities like FISH, CGH etc) and lobby aggressively for increased reimbursement for all anatomic pathology services. If one gets sued for 5 million dollars for misreading a PAP smear how can one justify paying less than 20 dollars for the diagnosis.
I may change my idea about CAP if they succeed in getting the "in office exception" of Starks Law for anatomic pathology services repealed. It will be a good start.
I hope the future is much brighter than the dismal present.
I have been pretty disappointed in my "parent organization" viz. CAP, so far. The leadership lacks focus and is not "aggressive enough". As long as this "passivity" continues we will continue losing our hard earned dollars (coupled with our respect as physicians) to hospitals, megalabs and other physicians.
It has been my longstanding conviction that diagnostics pathologists, especially surgical pathologists, should separate themselves from experimental, clinical and forensic pathologists. We have nothing in common. The worst mistake was leaving the surgery department and joining the pathology department. Surgical pathology should have started a whole new field and named itself "diagnostic medicine" but the surgical pathologists at that time had no or limited vision and we are suffering as a consequence. After renaming ourselves "Diagnostic medicine" we should move forward and incorporate all diagnostic modalities including basic/advanced imaging (even step into interventional procedures after all we already do some procedures like FNA and Bone marrow) and ofcourse molecular diagnostics (We should lobby for only physicians and not pHDs interpreting and reporting out newer tissue diagnostic modalities like FISH, CGH etc) and lobby aggressively for increased reimbursement for all anatomic pathology services. If one gets sued for 5 million dollars for misreading a PAP smear how can one justify paying less than 20 dollars for the diagnosis.
I may change my idea about CAP if they succeed in getting the "in office exception" of Starks Law for anatomic pathology services repealed. It will be a good start.
I hope the future is much brighter than the dismal present.
Similar threads
